So, normal art-writing nonsense. Or maybe I should say that, in presenting the problematic sentence first, and the putative "retroactive explanation" some dist

So, normal art-writing nonsense. Or maybe I should say that, in presenting the problematic sentence first, and the putative "retroactive explanation" some distance later, the author has engaged in a form of dialectic which invites the reader to ask the question for themselves, or, in presuming the answer, become part of the joke.